Social Psychology. Daniel W. Barrett

new generation (Darwin, 1859/1994). In other words, these genes—what are called adaptive genes—endow their animal or plant carrier with advantages that make them more likely to survive and reproduce in comparison to those that do not have them. Darwin recognized that there is natural variation in the genes of the members of a species, and that as a result, some members are better adapted to their environments than are others (see photo). The fortunate members have a higher probability of producing healthy offspring and, over time, their adaptive genes and corresponding traits become more common in the population. Eventually, virtually all members of the species carry the adaptive traits. For example, all humans (and all primates) have opposable thumbs, a feature that we now take for granted but that evolved over the course of millions of years.

      One of the implications of natural selection is that characteristics—whether physiological or psychological—that are universally shared in a species are very likely the result of evolution. If similar psychological tendencies are found in humans regardless of culture, then there is a high probability that evolutionary pressures are responsible. For instance, individuals in all cultures share a taboo against incest. Whenever I talk to my students about incest, they shake their heads and show expressions of disgust. Yes, it is disgusting to think about—but why? Once we get past the mere disgust factor, students correctly point out that inbreeding increases the chances that offspring will have characteristics—genetic defects—that decrease the probability of survival. Evolutionary pressures have led to universal incest avoidance, and the disgust that we feel about incest is a psychological adaptation that has minimized its likelihood (HBO’s fantasy series Game of Thrones notwithstanding!). Biology clearly has a profound effect on social behavior. Returning to our opening example, how might our biology affect our sexual orientation?

      Charles Darwin

      ©iStockphoto.com/stockcam.

      A recent study nicely illustrates how the evolutionary perspective can be applied to understanding romantic attraction. Consider that the scent of a woman during ovulation can impact how a man rates the attractiveness of potential female partners (S. L. Miller & Maner, 2011). Miller and Maner (2011) had individual males work on a puzzle involving building blocks with a young female who was secretly working with the experimenter and was trained to refrain from flirtatious behavior. After the task the men were asked to rate her attractiveness, and how highly they rated her depended on two factors: whether or not they were in a romantic relationship and, believe it or not, whether or not she was ovulating. Single males rated her as more attractive when she was fertile versus when she was not, but men with partners showed the opposite tendency. Committed men downgraded her attractiveness, as if they were trying to avoid the temptation of an attractive woman! This is just one recent example of how biological factors can influence social behavior.

      Moreover, advances in technology have ushered in the new subfield of social neuroscience that studies the relationships between social psychology and the brain (see Figure 1.4) (Todorov, Fiske, & Prentice, 2011). Social neuroscience applies sophisticated technology to investigating the complex interrelationships between social psychological phenomena—thoughts, feelings, and behavior—and the human nervous system (Ochsner, 2007). Chapter 2 provides a detailed explication of the logic and methods of social neuroscience, and we will discuss it throughout the text to show how it can complement existing approaches to a wide variety of topics.

      Figure 1.4 Social Neuroscience: Connecting Brain and Social Behavior

      Sometimes called social cognitive neuroscience—social neuroscience uses advanced technology to examine the interrelationships among the brain and social experiences, including thoughts, feelings, and behaviors.

      Natural Selection: Genes that tend to increase the chances of survival of their carrier are more likely to be passed on to a new generation

      Contextual Influences

      This second level of analysis focuses on group-level explanations for social behavior and compliments insights gleaned from the evolutionary approach. Here we focus on broad influences such as culture, social class, race, and religion. For example, Leon Mann (1981) adopted this approach when he investigated how crowd size impacts the likelihood that onlookers encourage—or bait—a would-be suicide jumper into actually leaping from a bridge or building. Interestingly, he found that baiting was more prevalent in larger groups! We discuss additional ways in which group size affects social behavior in the chapters on social influence, persuasion, and group processes (Chapters 6, 7, and 12, respectively).

      For much of the 20th century, psychologists mostly studied wealthy white North American male college students and assumed that the findings were universal and therefore as valid in Cairo or Rio de Janeiro as in Boston (Heine, 2010a). In other words, culture’s effects on social behavior were not widely recognized by psychologists. However, in recent years there has been an increasing recognition of the profound effects of culture on our social behavior, including phenomena as varied as self-concept, self-esteem, perceptions of time, attitudes toward marriage, and beliefs about mental illness (Gelfand, Chiu, & Hong, 2011; Valsiner, 2012; Vauclair et al., 2015). Culture can be defined as a system of enduring meanings, perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and practices shared by a large group of people. It is important to note that, although nations may be dominated by a particular culture, cultures are not necessarily nations. For instance, scholars have described cross-cultural differences that extend across nations, such as those between Western and Eastern cultures (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010; Triandis, 1993), as well as within-culture differences, like those distinguishing the American South from the North (Nisbett & Cohen, 1996).

      The most widely studied cross-cultural variable is individualism-collectivism (IC), which was initially conceptualized as broadly distinguishing the Western cultures of North America and parts of Europe from Eastern ones in South and East Asia, including China and Japan (Hofstede, 1986; Triandis, 1993; van Hoorn, 2015). However, more recently researchers have discovered that the IC dimension is more complex, varying within cultures and extending to cultures on other continents, including South America. Succinctly put, individualists are self-focused: They define themselves as containing stable, internal traits not tied to particular groups, value individual choice, and place their personal preferences and goals above those of the group.

      In contrast, collectivists tend to be other-focused: Their self-concept is intimately tied to and defined by their group memberships, individual choice is not highly valued, and personal preferences and goals are subordinated to those of the group (Triandis, 1993). It is important to note that, although we often talk about individualist and collectivistic cultures as if they were completely different, there is in fact considerable overlap: People in one type of culture can and do exhibit characteristics common in people from the other type (Cialdini, Wosinska, Barrett, Butner, & Gornik-Durose, 1999; Hofstede, de Hilal, Malvezzi, Tanure, & Vinken, 2010; Triandis & Gelfand, 2012; Triandis & Singelis, 1998). We will return again and again to culture’s prominent role in explaining elements of social behavior throughout this text.

      Culture: System of enduring meanings, perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and practices shared by a large group of people

      Individual Factors

      The third level of analysis seeks to explain social behavior by examining a particular person’s experiences, learning history, and mental processes. What have you learned and how does that affect your social experiences? Psychologists speak of three learning processes (that you undoubtedly were exposed to in your introductory psychology course): classical, instrumental, and social. Classical conditioning was accidentally discovered by the Russian physiologist Pavlov (1906) during his famous